How often ? (1 Viewer)

Yes it was a case in Soviet time (15 years ago)!!! Additional ring was placed if bird was marked not in Soviet Union. It might be that some countries do that until now. However, nowadays is not a case in most of countries. Several (color) rings used just for individual marking and placed at once. I believe you misunderstood the case.

Black Wheatear said:

Actually this is really a message to JohnZ. See what you started? Finally here the situation has gone completely away from your main point. You meet good and bad in all walks of life, but I still haven't met anyone bad enough to fit 3 metal rings on the same bird and I've been ringing for over 36 years! Photographers, Birdwatchers, Twitchers, Mr and Mrs Grumpies I love you all!

Click to expand...

Although JohnZ started this thread I do not think he can be accused of starting this debate on ringing ethics which has gone on for a very long time. There will never be any full agreement between ringers, non-ringers and in-betweens but the subject still deserves airing.

As I said, I am treading very lightly here because I realise that this is a very sensitive issue. My three scenarios related above may well be extreme examples but they are fact and I am sure anyone would be able to appreciate how they have coloured my vision regarding ringing.

I would tend to side with Keith Reeder in his comment that it is the motives of some ringers which are questionable. I have seen good ringers at work getting on with a scientific job and doing it very well. I have also had experience of the other end of the spectrum; itinerant volunteers who travel to ringing stations purely and simply to get their hands on birds with little or no care for the scientific value of what they were doing but simply wanting to increase their "net tick" list. I can actually think of a small number of these people who actually had little interest in birding or bird watching, they just got their pleasure from the feel of the birds in their hands.

As people have stated above, every aspect of life has its good and bad points and bird ringing is no exception.

I'm probably out of my depth a little here, (and should keep well out, not really having any strong opinions on it ), but could there be some situations caused by the way ringing works. Not done my research, but isn't it the case that to move up the 'ringing ladder', progressing from apprentice to 'c' class to to proper ringer you have to ring so many thousands of birds?

Of course this may be to ensure that the ringer was experienced and adept at safely ringing and handling birds, but surely this could lead to situations where groups/individuals go a little too much 'all out' to ring as many birds as possible (and in the easiest way), and could lead to some bad practises? And of course getting better or 'rarer' species would be good for their progression too?

(apololgies if I've got that all wrong)

dantheman said:

And of course getting better or 'rarer' species would be good for their progression too?

Click to expand...

Precisely, it is just like birding, except that they want to fondle them rather than just look at them in their natural environment.

dantheman said:

Not done my research, but isn't it the case that to move up the 'ringing ladder', progressing from apprentice to 'c' class to to proper ringer you have to ring so many thousands of birds?

Of course this may be to ensure that the ringer was experienced and adept at safely ringing and handling birds, but surely this could lead to situations where groups/individuals go a little too much 'all out' to ring as many birds as possible (and in the easiest way), and could lead to some bad practises? And of course getting better or 'rarer' species would be good for their progression too?

Click to expand...

I can see where you're coming from with this Dan, but there's a couple of reasons why these situations shouldn't cause problems as described... though I'm not saying that they don't in occasional situations.

There is no direct correlation between number of birds ringed and 'promotion' - although guidelines for minimum number of birds are given in the BTO Ringers' Manual, it is heavily stressed that these are not absolute, and are far from the only criteria. The way it is worded suggests that an individual should be promoted when they are sufficiently competent (and that having ringed a certain number of individuals is only likely to be one possible indicator of this competence). If people are promoted purely on grounds of the number of birds handled (and no-one's provided a shred of evidence to say it is), then I'm pretty confident that the BTO would take a very dim view. Similarly, no-one should be trapping the same bird day in, day out, and adding extra rings each time, so this isn't a valid or permissible shortcut to promotion either.

Secondly, and more strongly, the manual presents rules about when it is and isn't acceptable to actively seek to ring a rarity whose presence is already known. In general, I'm fairly sure it's not permitted, unless there is a strong scientific reason for doing so (the minute probability that the bird will be retrapped elsewhere and thus provide data is not sufficient). This means that the appalling situation Colin described with the Moussiers Redstart should definitely not occur, and ringers' licences being revoked is appropriate - it's just an enormous shame it ever came to that.

[By the way, I'm not a qualified, or even a trainee ringer - so I'm not necessarily best placed to comment, and may have misremembered the above. Apologies if this is the case, please let me know.]

I guess what I'm trying to say is that although the population of ringers probably does have the usual small percentage of 'bad apples', as does any group, there are strict controlling guidelines in place. If people feel that those guidelines are not being adequately enforced (or even that they're not appropriate), then the best course of action is surely to take the issue up first with the ringer(s) concerned, and then if necessary with the BTO or equivalent organisation.

I'm sure that many / all of these organisations are acutely aware that they have got a delicate PR situation to manage (for instance, the BTO manual stresses the need to allay the concerns of non-ringers). This means that where things are questioned, or have gone wrong, they ought to be doubly keen to sort them out - this will ultimately make the valuable scientific studies they conduct better supported.

Anyway, just my 2p...

dbradnum said:

There is no direct correlation between number of birds ringed and 'promotion' - although guidelines for minimum number of birds are given in the BTO Ringers' Manual, it is heavily stressed that these are not absolute, and are far from the only criteria. The way it is worded suggests that an individual should be promoted when they are sufficiently competent (and that having ringed a certain number of individuals is only likely to be one possible indicator of this competence).

Click to expand...

Some sensible words David, but the fact remains that "quantity and quality" (of birds trapped) counts an awful lot to a ringer's progression through the ranks. I know three people who have recently been to Greece, Equador and Israel quite simply to boost their "productivity" with a view to having their licenses upgraded.

I only wish that these people would, like me, put all their efforts into conservation before there are no more birds to ring.

Colin

Colin Key said:

I know three people who have recently been to Greece, Equador and Israel quite simply to boost their "productivity" with a view to having their licenses upgraded.

Click to expand...

Interesting point: but is there actually anything wrong with that per se, though?

Provided that they abide by the usual ringers' guidelines, then this seems like a sensible way to learn about ringing a range of different species and thus develop your skills - certainly far better than ringing more frequently and potentially stressing birds in the UK, or chasing rarities to ring in the UK. Plus I would imagine that the quantity of ringing going on the countries you mention is relatively small, so there is actually an opportunity to further some scientific study, which could be used to focus the conservation efforts that you mention?

dbradnum said:

Interesting point: but is there actually anything wrong with that per se, though?

Provided that they abide by the usual ringers' guidelines, then this seems like a sensible way to learn about ringing a range of different species and thus develop your skills - certainly far better than ringing more frequently and potentially stressing birds in the UK, or chasing rarities to ring in the UK. Plus I would imagine that the quantity of ringing going on the countries you mention is relatively small, so there is actually an opportunity to further some scientific study, which could be used to focus the conservation efforts that you mention?

Click to expand...

David,

Yes, I do think that that there is something very wrong here. The guy who is going to Ecquador has admitted that his main purpose is to increase his "net tick" list of hummingbirds. He will return with a list of exotic "hand held" species (plus photos) and not really give a toss about the scientific merit of what he has being doing or what the results of his ringing will produce.

I find this very depressing, especially as it is done in the name of "science".

Colin

Black Wheatear, Perhaps I should remind you of my original question which was about the frequency of the ringing at Bough Beech. I have started absolutely nothing as far as I am concerned.
During this thread I have had the patronising post from Estebannic otherwise known as Spanish Steve who having signed a post Steve I had assumed, obviously wrongly, may be an ex-pat. I can only apologise to Steve as I did not realise that this was a name commonly in use in Spain.
We then went through a phase of everybody having a pop at deborah4 who, I suspect, was trying to get me out of the mire that my thread was very quickly descending in to. "Extreme ignorance" springs to mind.
And now finally we have had some posts from Colin who appears to know a little bit about ringing, maybe even a lot ! Hopefully some of the earlier posters will now return and try and disprove some of that which Colin has so eloquently explained.
dbradnum, "Certainly far better than ringing more frequently and potentially stressing birds in the U.K.". In my ignorance I thought it had already been explained, in this thread, that there was minimal stress involved and that birds were intelligent creatures and would avoid the nets. I also thought that ringing on a CES meant turning up fortnightly. Perhaps I misunderstood.

Colin Key said:

Some sensible words David, but the fact remains that "quantity and quality" (of birds trapped) counts an awful lot to a ringer's progression through the ranks. I know three people who have recently been to Greece, Equador and Israel quite simply to boost their "productivity" with a view to having their licenses upgraded.

I only wish that these people would, like me, put all their efforts into conservation before there are no more birds to ring.

Colin

Click to expand...

Many birders visit other countries and participate in certain projects while having as motivation the new species they are going to see/ring. In Greece we depend on an important part of our activity on the help foreigh ringers are willing to give. Of course they are not allowed to ring on their own. On the contrary, they participate in certain ringing programms with certain scientific goals and always supervised if not A ringers. THere is an organisation here- as in every country (the Hellenic Bird Ringing Center) responsible to organize/ coordinate ringing in Greece, reporting and supervised by Euring. Not being able to know what everyone has deep in his/her mind the fact is that these people eventually work on a demanding and tyring daily programme, often in not the most favourable conditions (e.g. accomodation etc) and always under the essential conditions for proper and safe ringing.

egalinou said:

Many birders visit other countries and participate in certain projects while having as motivation the new species they are going to see/ring. In Greece we depend on an important part of our activity on the help foreigh ringers are willing to give. Of course they are not allowed to ring on their own. On the contrary, they participate in certain ringing programms with certain scientific goals and always supervised if not A ringers. THere is an organisation here- as in every country (the Hellenic Bird Ringing Center) responsible to organize/ coordinate ringing in Greece, reporting and supervised by Euring. Not being able to know what everyone has deep in his/her mind the fact is that these people eventually work on a demanding and tyring daily programme, often in not the most favourable conditions (e.g. accomodation etc) and always under the essential conditions for proper and safe ringing.

Click to expand...

I am certainly not attempting to tar every ringer with the same brush as I know that a lot of them are well intentioned people with a professional attitude and approach. I am just putting forward my personal views with some examples to show why I hold those views. I do indeed know some people (and they are friends, not casual acquaintances or arch enemies) who travel to ringing centres for the "tick and the kick" with little regard or interest in the scientific value of their endeavour.

Colin

deborah4 said:

I used the term loosly: .

Click to expand...

Maybe you should have made that clear? If you use a term, I'm bound to think that's the term you mean...

deborah4 said:

I don't know the ins and outs about how the schemes are financed .

Click to expand...

Note to JohnZ, this is what I mean by extreme ignorance. Deborah4 admits she knows nothing about it, yet still convolutes an imaginary scenario by which she damns those involved. Why not ask, and then make judgement, rather than make judgement on something you've plucked out of the air?

deborah4 said:

the survival of the scheme depends on 'doing business' with volunteers. If it wasn't for volunteers paying for training and for accommodation, wouldn't the 'business' collapse? The point is, there is a 'business' interest at stake here, and it's in the vested interests of those that run the Scheme that enough volunteers are paying to support it (or providing services for nothing). .

Click to expand...

If you think this through, it quickly unravels. The participants effectively finance the course on a 'costs only' basis. Everyone else is volunteering time and paying their own costs. The accommodation is provided by observatories etc on a costs only basis too. So, there is no business to collapse, as the courses have no running costs unless there are students present. It's a bit like 'pay as you go'. If there are no students then there is no course, and it costs the BTO nothing. If there *are* students, they pay the costs and it STILL costs the BTO nothing, but ALSO they receive nothing. So where is the vested business interest, if it costs or profits the BTO zero in all scenarios?

If you want to know how these things work, then please ask before guessing. Then make up your mind. Mark Grantham or other ringers will be happy to tell you - it's all completely transparent.

Colin Key said:

I am certainly not attempting to tar every ringer with the same brush as I know that a lot of them are well intentioned people with a professional attitude and approach. I am just putting forward my personal views with some examples to show why I hold those views. I do indeed know some people (and they are friends, not casual acquaintances or arch enemies) who travel to ringing centres for the "tick and the kick" with little regard or interest in the scientific value of their endeavour.

Colin

Click to expand...

I think, the problem is (as some one already pointed), that some people directly becoming negative to all ringers after reading notes about some outliers, and it frustrating. I think everyone will agree, that similar outliers present in people with different hobbies or professions.
Back to JohnZ question Nr.1.: it might be, that frequency of ringing in that place is to high and related to human factor (willing to spend every free day (weekend) with birds as you do with your hobby - photography), therefore, can be discussed with ringers directly and I believe solution will be found. However, I do not think, that high (1 day per week in this case) frequency of ringing have much bigger negative affect on birds at the feeder as every day bird-watching from the close distance assuming multiple number of bird-watchers also adding even close lock of photographers. By observing birds at my feeder, I can assure that some bird species land on my feeder just if there are no people around. I don’t see difference in their come back after people disappear or after I marked (I ring them once/month) them.
Short comment: bird-watchers observe birds at my feeder from about 15-20 m., photographers 10-15 J, number of observers is approximately 3/day staying 10-30min.

Poecile said:

Maybe you should have made that clear? If you use a term, I'm bound to think that's the term you mean...



Note to JohnZ, this is what I mean by extreme ignorance. Deborah4 admits she knows nothing about it, yet still convolutes an imaginary scenario by which she damns those involved. Why not ask, and then make judgement, rather than make judgement on something you've plucked out of the air?

Click to expand...

I'm not going to address yet further insult to me on this thread Poecile and trreat it with the contempt it deserves. As for the issues, I think you've probably articulated the concerns previously far more eloquently that I can

''But if Finnish ringing is anything like British ringing, then you'll know that it's not as easy as that, as the scheme will be controlled by a very few people who have apparent ultimate authority, and many of the ringers will exist in a small community where dissent is not welcome and is easily expelled to preserve their interests. The few in authority are also totally reliant on the ringing community, as they are volunteers who provide data [work] for nothing and also pay for the priviledge, keeping the scheme afloat and those in authority in a job. So there appears very little scope for changing things.

Click to expand...

Having said that, Jurek, I think this debate should be reviewed and revisited periodically. My opinion has changed a little over time. Ringing itself, and perhaps ringers, does seem to have changed a little. Or perhaps ringing and ringers haven't kept pace with the changes in knowledge and what we need ringing for. I'm quite uncomfortable with the ringing of rarities, for instance, and there is a definite 'twitching' element that is creeping into ringing - those tallying extraction ticks and ringing ticks, even handling ticks, for instance. It's totally unnecesaary and not what the UK ringing scheme was set up for. I've seen a ringer chasing a knackered rarity with a hand-held net. To me, that's unethical - ringing the thing would tell you nothing useful about such a vagrant, it will only serve to distress it for no purpose than it's rarity value and place on some anorak's list. And this was at an observatory, where it was seen as nothing unusual. Just look at the 'trophy photos' you get on many ringing websites too. It reminds me of the sort of thing you see in angling or shooting magazines, of proud hunters showing off their impressive quarry.

Routine opportunistic ringing of migrants at observatories is also becoming questionable in some instances, in my opinion. It should be more targetted for specific population studies, not just an ad-hoc "let's go to e.g. Holme and stick some nets up and ring whatever falls in", which is what visiting ringers do. It's never standardised. And when this involves exhausted Goldcrests there doesn't seem a lot of point - we know where they go and where they come from and there are clear welfare issues. Ringing does carry a mortality rate. Yes, many eg goldcrests can be chucked, and nets closed if they're very light or the weather bad, but such ad-hoc and opportunistic ringing of migrants needs greater control and targetting for a clear purpose, I think. CES and RAS ringing is different, and far more defensible. Indeed, it's vital if we're to understand bird populations. But the BTO needs to get a firm grip of the ringing scheme and redefine its purpose and aims more clearly as, in my opinion, ringing is becoming more passtime and less science.

Click to expand...

This is a good debate and there are obviously issues to be discussed and concerns to be aired. However, I will not make a further contribution to a debate that has resulted in launching of personal attacks or bullying in order to silence those issues being raised. Its childish and infantile and does no credit whatsoever to those who have an alternative perspective to others.

deborah4 said:

Its childish and infantile and does no credit whatsoever to those who have an alternative perspective to others.

Click to expand...

So's spitting out your dummy when people don't agree with your mode of debate and challenge your (not shrinking) attacks, but horses for courses...

I still stand by the quotes you bring up again, although they are not relevant to what we're discussing here:

I do have significant problems with some of the ringing of rarities and other activities at observatories, but the ringing we're talking about at Bough Beeches - fortnightly monitoring of populations of common birds through ringing -I'll defend that to the end. Weekly would be fine by me. (you could have highlighted the second paragraph in the second quote, for instance).

I also stand by the point on the ringing scheme, although it is different to the specific attack you were making on ringing *courses*. The ringing SCHEME is reliant on ringers paying subsciptions which covers the staff costs, although that still doesn't make it a business if it isn't making a profit, not in the sense you were implying. The ringing COURSES are different, as there is usually no staff cost, so I stand by my prevous points on that.

As mentioned in previous posts, the BTO Ringing Scheme does work to strict guidelines, and I hope we can clarify a few points here. Anyone training to ring (which works rather like an apprenticeship) must reach a set standard before they are issued with a permit, and even then a permit may still have some restrictions. Although minimum numbers ringed have to be reached to gain a permit, training is not a numbers game, but is about obtaining skills. All permit applications are reviewed carefully and require references from appropriately qualified ringers.

Ringing schemes throughout the world work to similar objectives, collecting data to monitor populations (survival, return rates and productivity) and movements. Ringing abroad has two benefits. In many countries, the help of BTO ringers is a great asset, and many of our ringers are involved in training programmes around the globe. In addition, ringing abroad helps an individual ringer to broaden their experience and improve their ringing.

If anyone does have any specific queries or concerns about any ringing, please approach the ringer(s) concerned initially. If you still have concerns, please contact us at the Ringing Unit ([email protected]). We will be happy to answer your questions and will always investigate any apparent breaches of the rules of the Ringing Scheme. If your concern involves ringing in another country, please contact the relevant scheme (see http://www.euring.org/national_schemes/index.htm for addresses etc).

Although its difficult to answer every question posed in one posting, answers to many common questions can be found online, where you can view:

The Objectives of the Ringing Scheme:
http://www.bto.org/ringing/ringinfo/objectives.htm
Details of the CES programme:
http://www.bto.org/ringing/ringinfo/ces/index.htm
General information on ringing and recovery reporting:
http://www.bto.org/ringing/resources/displays/bird-ringing.pdf
General work of EURING, which coordinates ringing throughout Europe:
http://www.euring.org/index.htm

Mark Grantham
On behalf of the BTO Ringing Scheme

Lets face it ringing has its merits , but you are always going to get people that dont agree with it. Same as people wont agree with wing tagging, but there is no need for people to be abused just for having a different slant on things

Poecile, Instead of continually having a go at deborah4 would you care to address some of the points raised by Colin ? Your continuous rants at deborah4 may lead folks to believe you may have a somewhat different agenda to the rest of the people who have posted on here.
It was very magnanimous of you to concede that you have significant concerns about the activities at observatories. But, as you also mention, we are/were talking about Bough Beech.
At the risk of offending, which is certainly not my intention, I can only imagine you must have plenty of time on your hands. The reasons for this being your business and yours alone. However I have to work and hence only get two days off per week. I think that I mentioned in my opening post that I may be regarded as selfish in that I would like to spend at least one of those two days taking photographs of birds.
The weather has been particularly bad recently so I could see no point in travelling miles to view birds either in the rain or just plain bad light. Yes I do check the weather forecasts on the Met office site. No good for photography ! I therefore go to either Bough Beech or Sevenoaks WT as they are local.
If you are happy to see weekly ringing that is fine by me. All I ask is that they post a message somewhere on the site that this is going to happen. I can then go somewhere else !

JohnZ said:

dbradnum, "Certainly far better than ringing more frequently and potentially stressing birds in the U.K.". In my ignorance I thought it had already been explained, in this thread, that there was minimal stress involved and that birds were intelligent creatures and would avoid the nets. I also thought that ringing on a CES meant turning up fortnightly. Perhaps I misunderstood.

Click to expand...

I think possibly you did, though that's more to do with my failure to articulate what I meant than anything on your part!

What I meant was that if an individual is keen to progress quickly as a ringer, and wants to handle a range of unfamiliar species, or just more individuals of the same species, then going abroad to do so (under suitably controlled conditions) is better than breaching the regulations set out in this country, which could lead to stress to birds. For no particularly good reason (having now re-read the thread) I had thought the latter was what was being suggested or implied by others here - apologies.